Political News and Commentary from the Right

A friend from high school just pointed out this great sign posted in someone’s yard. It appears the man’s neighbor is a proponent of total gun control. This is absolutely fabulous.

According to the caption on Facebook, the neighbor didn’t like his self-inflicted vulnerability made public and called police. The police told him his only recourse was to get a court order to remove the sign. Evidently the liberal left-door neighbor was unable to have the sign removed through the courts and city council. Our right-minded ally then made several outreach efforts in the hope of treating his neighbor’s political condition, to no avail.

“Stop messing with Texas!” That was the message Gov. Rick Perry bellowed on election night as he celebrated his victory over Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison in the Republican primary for governor. In his reference to Texas’ anti-littering slogan, Perry was making a point applicable to national as well as Texas politics and addressed to Democratic politicians as well as Republicans.

His point was that the big government policies of the Obama administration and Democratic congressional leaders are resented and fiercely opposed not just because of their dire fiscal effects but also as an intrusion on voters’ independence and ability to make decisions for themselves.

No one would include Perry on a list of serious presidential candidates, including himself, even in the flush of victory. But in his 10 years as governor, the longest in the state’s history, Texas has been teaching some lessons to which the rest of the nation should pay heed.

They are lessons that are particularly vivid when you contrast Texas, the nation’s second most populous state, with the most populous, California. Both were once Mexican territory, secured for the United States in the 1840s. Both have grown prodigiously over the past half-century. Both have populations that today are about one-third Hispanic.

But they differ vividly in public policy and in their economic progress — or lack of it — over the last decade. California has gone in for big government in a big way. Democrats hold large margins in the legislature largely because affluent voters in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay area favor their liberal positions on cultural issues.

One of the major differences between the right and the left concerns the question of authority: To whom do we owe obedience and who is the ultimate moral authority?

For the right, the primary moral authority is God (or, for secular conservatives, Judeo-Christian values), followed by parents. Of course, government must also play a role, but it is ultimately accountable to God and it should do nothing to undermine parental authority.

For the left, the state and its government are the supreme authorities, while parental and divine authority are seen as impediments to state authority.

Let’s begin with God.

From Karl Marx — “man is God;” “religion is the opiate of the people” — to today’s left in America and elsewhere, God and God-based religion, specifically Judaism and Christianity (Islam, too, but in the West, Islam has played little role) have been the primary obstacles to leftist victory.

“Nobody Made A Greater Mistake Than He Who Did Nothing Because He Could Only Do a Little.” -Edmund Burke

Last week we let you know how you can help elect Lt. Col. Scott Brown (R) to Ted Kennedy’s old Senate seat in Massachusetts, and you responded! Brad Marston, another patriot from MA who’s working to get Brown elected was impressed by your response and left the following comment on that post:

Wow! Thank you so much for posting this. We lost the Public Policy poll vote (Those Ron Paul folks are good) but people can still make phone calls and of course donate if you can.

Dozens of you responded to Brad’s calls for donations and volunteers! And your efforts are resulting in huge gains in this battle for our American way of life. But we musn’t rest on our laurels now, for Liberal politicians are already plotting to subvert the will of Massachusetts voters when they lose this battle!

Soon after we posted last week, Rasmussen released a poll showing Brown trailing MA Attorney General Martha Coakley 50-41, but today the landscape has changed dramatically. Left-leaning pollster Tom Jensen with Public Policy Polling released numbers yesterday that have him in a state of near panic. Brown now leads Coakley 48-47 in the race!

Jensen points to the fact that Republicans are far more motivated to vote in this election than Democrats, and that Brown leads with independents by a stunning 63-31 margin. This in one of the most liberal states in the Union. Jensen then goes on to enumerate steps he believes can overcome Brown’s positives, which largely depend on motivating the Democrat base in MA.

Now, high ranking MA Democrats are promising to delay implementing the will of the Bay State’s voters when Brown wins next Tuesday! Paul Kirk (D-MA), who was appointed in a shady move to repeal MA law to give the Obama-Pelosi-Reid axis their 60 vote majority in the Senate, declares “We want to get this resolved before President Obama’s State of the Union address in early to mid-February,” speaking of completing work on the unconstitutional health care bill.

But, Kirk and Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin are conspiring to ignore the voters when Brown wins next week’s election. Brian McNiff, a Galvin spokesman, told the Boston Herald, “We’d have to wait 10 days for absentee and military ballots to come in.” And another Herald source states the results of next Tuesday’s election won’t be certified before February 20th.

Long enough that Kirk and other Democrat conspirators hope President Obama, Sen. Harry Reid, and Rep. Nancy Pelosi will have told Massachusetts voters “It doesn’t matter what they want or think or vote for, our ruling Democrats will do whatever the Hell they want and the voters can be damned if they don’t agree!” Because that’s exactly what passage of Obamacare will mean if Brown wins this election.

The message is clear from Democrats: “Massachusetts voters don’t matter, we’ll do what the Hell we want regardless of the outcome of the election!”

But Obama, Pelosi, and Reid aren’t accounting for the shock wave that will run through Democrat ranks in Congress when Republican Scott Brown wins the seat occupied so long by the ultra-liberal Ted Kennedy! Democrats took this race for granted because, after all, we’re talking Massachusetts here. The state where champions of the left Barney Frank and Ted Kennedy couldn’t lose!

A victory by a Republican here, in what some might consider the heart of liberal America, would put every left-leaning liberal Democrat on notice: “Vote for Obamacare at your political peril!”

And Democrats are scared!

“It would be unconscionable for the seat held for 40 years by the inestimable Senator Kennedy to be allowed to pass to an enemy of everything he stood for.” “Massachusetts is a progressive state, always has been, always will be. Scott Brown is the antithesis of a progressive. He has no business running in this state. …His election would be an insult to Kennedy’s memory.” ~Harry Reid (D-NV)~

A Brown victory may even turn some progressive Democrats from supporting this bill that WILL increase taxes AND raise health insurance premiums, that WILL make taxpayers responsible for abortions, that WILL increase the deficit, that WILL result in the rationing of health care (especially for seniors), and that WILL eventually cover illegal aliens!

That’s why it’s essential conservatives across the country rally behind and support Lt. Col. Scott Brown’s campaign for US Senate! Now’s the time to donate what you can. Even if it’s only $5, please donate what you can. Now’s the time to volunteer. Even if you can only make a couple of calls a day.

This race could be the hinge that allows the door to begin to swing the other way. Please step up and help however you can!

The only people who didn’t expect job losses were likely the Marxist, Socialist, oblivious-to-reality Liberal politicians, bureaucrats, and operatives in control who believe the best way to stimulate the economy is to destroy motivation and initiative by confiscating the fruits of producers’ labor and redistributing them to those who don’t produce.

Though the hard left will likely cling to the fact the unemployment rate held steady at 10%, the whole picture shows there’s little to be optimistic about in the job market. President Obama’s policies have led 661,000 to give up looking for work. That means they’re not even counted in the official 10% figure!

“If they were still looking for work and counted as the unemployed, the unemployment rate would have been 10.5 percent. This clearly isn’t your father’s recession. It is looking more like your great-grandfathers. Brother, can you spare a dime?”–Chris Rupkey, an economist with Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi

Taking the real unemployment number and combining it with the number of workers underemployed (working part-time but seeking full time employment), the bleak picture appears even more disastrous. Would be workers fitting these criteria make up 17.3% of America’s workforce, and actually rose from 17.2% last month.

During the height of the Christmas shopping season (that’s holiday shopping center to those who don’t believe freedom of religion applies to Christians), when more goods are purchased and shipped than at any other time of the year, real actually increased!

Even after all Obama’s “stimulus” programs!

Our Democrat Congress and White House quadrupled the deficit, set record budgets and national debt, and took over private corporations to save the economy and American jobs. But after nearly a year of suffering under Obamanomics, those saved and created jobs remain to be seen.

It may surprise many to discover which employment sectors are bearing the brunt of the damage inflicted by our Democrat leaders who so often proclaim they represent the “working people.” Those who believe such Leninist rhetoric might expect the “working class” to fare better than their white collar counterparts in the Obamaconomy. Given the President’s affinity for unions and their cozy involvement in setting Presidential policy these days, one might also expect sectors of the economy with a disproportionate number of union workers to fare better than less unionized sectors.

Au contraire!

In 2005, blue collar workers were almost twice as likely to be unionized than white collar workers. But last month, the US economy added 50,000 jobs in the white collar professional and business services sector but lost a combined 80,000 jobs in the disproportionately unionized manufacturing and construction sectors.

Blue collar workers are suffering worse under Obamanomics than their white collar neighbors!

It’s been asked before, but with the release of this latest evidence of the failure of Obamanomics the time has come yet again to ask.

At a time when our country is sick, it shouldn’t surprise that one our sickest places is our nation’s capital.

The poverty rate of Washington, DC, almost 20 percent, is one of the highest in the nation. Its child poverty rate is the nation’s highest..

DC’s public school system, with a graduation rate of less than 50 percent, is one of the worst in the country.

According to DC’s HIV/AIDS office, three percent of the local population has HIV or AIDS. The Administrator of this office notes that this HIV/AIDS incidence is “…higher than West Africa…on par with Uganda and some parts of Kenya.” And the principal way that HIV is transmitted continues to be through male homosexual activity.

Amidst this dismal picture, the DC City Council, perhaps on the theory that serving up another glass of wine is the way to help a drunk, is scheduled to vote on December 1 to legalize same sex marriage in America’s capital city.

Looking at realities in Washington, DC should make clear why George Washington said “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.”

But the America that our first president had in mind was very different from the vision of our DC government officials.

George Washington’s America was one in which the point of freedom is to allow Man to rise to what he can become. To do this, the greatest challenge he faces is conquering himself. To rise above his baser instincts, to rise above the many temptations that lead him astray. And to achieve this end, as Washington said, “religion and morality are indispensible supports.”

In left wing America, of which the DC government is a poster child, freedom means to indulge every instinct that the tradition and religion of George Washington would have us overcome.

WASHINGTON — Sure, Election Day 2009 will scare moderate Democrats and make passage of Obamacare more difficult. Sure, it makes it easier for resurgent Republicans to raise money and recruit candidates for 2010. But the most important effect of Tuesday’s elections is historical. It demolishes the great realignment myth of 2008.

In the aftermath of last year’s Obama sweep, we heard endlessly about its fundamental, revolutionary, transformational nature. How it was ushering in an FDR-like realignment for the 21st century in which new demographics — most prominently, rising minorities and the young — would bury the GOP far into the future. One book proclaimed “The Death of Conservatism,” while the more modest merely predicted the terminal decline of the Republican Party into a regional party of the Deep South or a rump party of marginalized angry white men.

This was all ridiculous from the beginning. 2008 was a historical anomaly. A uniquely charismatic candidate was running at a time of deep war weariness, with an intensely unpopular Republican president, against a politically incompetent opponent, amid the greatest financial collapse since the Great Depression. And still he won by only seven points.

Exactly a year later comes the empirical validation of that skepticism. Virginia — presumed harbinger of the new realignment, having gone Democratic in ’08 for the first time in 44 years — went red again. With a vengeance. Barack Obama had carried it by six points. The Republican gubernatorial candidate won by 17 — a 23-point swing. New Jersey went from plus 15 Democratic in 2008 to minus 4 in 2009. A 19-point swing.

“In (McDonnell’s master’s thesis), he described women having jobs as detrimental to the family, called legalized use of contraception illogical, pushed to make divorce more difficult, and insisted government should favor married couples over, quote, ‘cohabitators, homosexuals or fornicators.’ Wow. When did he write this? 1875? No, 1989. Wow, 1989.

“Goodbye, Mr. McDonnell.”

MSNBC, Sept. 22, 2009, Rachel Maddow also on McDonnell:

“And here’s where the conservative movement and the Republican establishment smash into each other like bumper cars without bumpers. Here’s where Republican electoral chances stop being separate from the wild-eyed excesses of the conservative movement.

“Part of watching Republicans try to return to power is watching … the conservative movement eat the Republican Party, eat their electoral chances over and over and over again.”

On election night, conservatives-eating-Republicans resulted in an 18-point landslide for McDonnell, who beat his Democratic opponent 59 percent to 41 percent — winning two-thirds of all independent voters and ending the Democrats’ eight-year reign in the Virginia governor’s office.

Republicans swept all statewide offices for the first time in 12 years, winning the races for lieutenant governor and attorney general, as well as assembly seats, garbage inspector, dog catcher and anything else Virginians could vote for.